# Bihar Military Police Constable (under training) v. State of Bihar & Ors.

HTML version: [https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2011-0027](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2011-0027)

## Report card

By judgment dated 8 April 2011 in Civil Appeal No. 3131 of 2011, the Supreme Court of India (Coram: Anil R. Dave, Mukundakam Sharma, JJ.) upheld the disciplinary action taken against the Constable (under training), Bihar Military Police.

- Register number: BR 00 CW 0003
- Case reference: Civil Appeal No. 3131 of 2011 / (2011) 13 SCC 118; AIR 2011 SC 1790
- Court and date: Supreme Court of India (Coram: Anil R. Dave, Mukundakam Sharma, JJ.), 8 April 2011
- Officer(s) at the material time: Constable (under training), Bihar Military Police
- Present service status: Not ascertained from the cited sources.
- Provisions invoked: Rule 46 of the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950; Rule 107 of the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950
- Finding of the Court (extract): “In our opinion, the authorities and the High Court were right in coming to the conclusion that as the appellant was removed from service by way of dismissal on account of his misconduct, the appellant was not entitled to get …” (at para 14)
- Verdict, sentence and quantum: Disciplinary action upheld. Sentence: dismissal.
- Present status of the proceedings: No further proceedings are recorded in the cited sources; the judgment is the concluded position shown.
- Source orders: [Judgment / order (primary source)](https://indiankanoon.org/doc/638434/); [Permanent link to this record](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2011-0027)

**Record:** CW-2011-0027 (compiler id CWC-1116); case GAP3-130-001
**Title:** Bihar Military Police Constable (under training) v. State of Bihar & Ors.
**Court:** Supreme Court of India; judges: Anil R. Dave; Mukundakam Sharma
**Case number / citation:** Civil Appeal No. 3131 of 2011 / (2011) 13 SCC 118; AIR 2011 SC 1790
**Judgment:** 2011-04-08 (2011, day precision)
**Incident date:** 1977-01-01 (1977)
**Place:** Palamu, Bihar (district at time: Palamu (undivided Bihar; now in Jharkhand)); police station or unit: BMP-1, Ranchi; force: state_police
**Category:** Other misconduct
**Sub-category:** other
**Outcome:** Disciplinary action upheld (disciplinary_upheld)
**Sections:** Bihar Pension Rules 1950 Rule 46; Bihar Pension Rules 1950 Rule 107
**Officers (gated display forms):** Constable (under training), Bihar Military Police (1 in record)
**Victims:** Not stated (0 in record)
**Sentence / compensation:** dismissal
**Sentence type:** dismissal (dismissal)

The appellant, appointed as a constable, absconded from the Commandant Training Centre, BMP-1, Ranchi while under suspension and remained unauthorisedly absent for 105 days; after a departmental inquiry the Superintendent of Police, Palamu ended his service by order dated 14 September 1977, and his departmental appeal to the DIG was dismissed. Years later he claimed pension, contending the order said discharge rather than dismissal. The Supreme Court held the order was in substance a dismissal for misconduct, that discharge is not a punishment known to the Bihar Police Manual, and that as a dismissed employee he was entitled to no pension under Rule 46 of the Bihar Pension Rules, 1950. The appeal was dismissed with no order as to costs; this is an internal service-discipline matter with no citizen victim.

> In our opinion, the authorities and the High Court were right in coming to the conclusion that as the appellant was removed from service by way of dismissal on account of his misconduct, the appellant was not entitled to get any pension as per Rule 46 of the Rules.

**Sources (1):** [indiankanoon.org](https://indiankanoon.org/doc/638434/)
**Verification:** V2 · Externally reported
**Review:** Solo Staff combined review (one combined attestation) — not yet recorded
**admin category:** misconduct
**admin subcategory:** other
**allegations:** {'category': 'Other', 'primary': True, 'position': 'Material fact supported', 'position_explainer': 'Reliable material supports a specifically documented fact relevant to that allegation, not necessarily the full allegation, causation, intent, unlawfulness, or responsibility.', 'official_finding_relation': 'supports allegation'}
**anonymised:** False
**court quote para:** 14
**display title redacted:** Bihar Military Police Constable (under training) v. State of Bihar & Ors.
**followup history:** {'date': '2026-09-19', 'scope': 'Round-8 full re-verification: published record re-checked against the judgment text (outcome, officers, quote, key facts) plus methodology-compliance pass', 'method': 'skills-guided adversarial re-verification of the published record against the judgment text (reverify/t1-*/adversarial-8.jsonl)', 'result': 'holds', 'corrections_applied': \[\]}
**followup status:** checked
**institutional response:** {'date': '2011-04-08', 'action_type': 'Order issued', 'status': 'Concluded', 'authority': 'Supreme Court of India', 'independence': 'External', 'legal_effect': 'Binding', 'description': 'The Supreme Court of India upheld service punishment imposed on police personnel.', 'disposition': 'Disciplinary action · Procedural only', 'source': '(2011) 13 SCC 118; AIR 2011 SC 1790', 'recheck': 'Not yet re-checked.'}
**last checked:** 2026-09-19
**link checked per url:** {'url': 'https://indiankanoon.org/doc/638434/', 'link_checked': None}
**retracted:** {"is_retracted": false}
**service:** police
**source assessment:** {"established": null, "basis": null}
**status:** current
**subcategory display:** other
**tier:** Tier A — Externally reported or officially recorded
**tier badge:** Externally reported
**tier history:** Tier A — Externally reported or officially recorded
**verdict:** accept
**verdict note:** SC dismissed appeal; dismissal of constable for 105 days absence upheld, pension denied.
**verification badge:** V2 · Externally reported
**verification status:** V2
**watch:** babuwatch

Status: Disciplinary action upheld.

[Open CW-2011-0027](https://datalibertarian.in/babuwatch/incident/CW-2011-0027)